[openib-general] QoS RFC - Resend using a friendly mailer

[Eitan Zahavi]

Hi Sasha,

Thanks for your comments.
Please see my comments inside

> > 3. Supported Policy
> > --------------------
> >
> > The QoS policy supported by this proposal is divided into 4 sub
sections:
> >
> > * Node Group: a set of HCAs, Routers or Switches that share the same
settings.
> > A node groups might be a partition defined by the partition manager
policy in
> > terms of GUIDs. Future implementations might provide support for
> NodeDescription
> > based definition of node groups.
> 
> Port/Node groups could be defined as separate configuration, then
those
> definitions will be shared by different policies like Partitions, QoS
(and
> maybe others in future).
[EZ] Great idea. I would suggest using NodeDescription as a way to get
node names. But this is yet another issue for discussion on the IBTA and
this list.
> 
> > * Fabric Setup:
> > Defines how the SL2VL and VLArb tables should be setup. This policy
definition
> > assumes the computation of target behavior should be performed
outside of
> > OpenSM.
> >
> > * QoS-Levels Definition:
> > This section defines the possible sets of parameters for QoS that a
client might
> > be mapped to. Each set holds: SL and optionally: Max MTU, Max Rate,
Path Bits
> > (in case LMC > 0 is used for QoS) and TClass.
> >
> > * Matching Rules:
> > A list of rules that match an incoming PathRecord request to a
QoS-Level. The
> > rules are processed in order such as the first match is applied.
Each rule is
> > built out of set of match expressions which should all match for the
rule to
> > apply. The matching expressions are defined for the following fields
> > ** SRC and DST to lists of node groups
> > ** Service-ID to a list of Service-ID or Service-ID ranges
> > ** TClass to a list of TClass values or ranges
> >
> > XML style syntax is provided for the policy file.
> 
> Why XML? It is not too much readable and writable (by human) format.
[EZ] Well, I agree with you but already got so many requests for XML
that I could not resists. Maybe we could do both. If we have a nice BNF
it would be just a matter of some yacc exercise. IMO it is the least of
our problems. 
> 
> Sasha
> _______________________________________________
> openib-general mailing list
> openib-general at openib.org
> http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
> 
> To unsubscribe, please visit
http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general